The "Who should rule" conundrum is a red herring, one that devastated entire civilizations. It just leads to bad philosophy ruining the very means of human progress. The better question is "How should we remove bad rulers?" That is, we need to focus on error correction rather than chasing perfect social choice theories. Mistakes are inevitable. But we can progress nonetheless by upholding a culture of criticism. This culture must be embedded in freedom technology, otherwise the means of error correction are bound to be co-opted by some ruling class. Nostr and bitcoin are the foundations we can build on. Focus on how freedom can actually be realized: technology that empowers the individual, step by step, meeting people where they are but striving to take them further gradually. Freedom-tech goes hand in hand with reality. That is why it is winning. Ask the right questions, don't get dragged down by red herrings. The future looks bright. Problems are soluble, and with proof of work we will get there. #karlpopper #daviddeutsch #philosophy #freedomtech

Nostr is no exception: If you can't program it, you don't understand it. #daviddeutsch

@jb55 I was wondering is #notedeck going to be able to support a relay-centric moderated community column? I am thinking of a column scoped to a specific relay with auth and supporting either hodlbod's [NIP](https://github.com/coracle-social/nips/blob/relay-chat/xx.md) or NIP29. I see issue #376 that single-relay column is planned ideed but what about functionality related to semi-closed groups? Is this perhaps possible with #nostrscript -enabled columns? Context: I am exploring possible options to create a discord-like space on nostr where I can hang out with Freedom Tech builders. So far #flotilla seems to be my best bet from @hodlbod but it is not optimized for easy and performant widgets that I need to have the best possible nostr experience tweaked to perfection for me and members. I would just share the required columns for the group and they could add it to their nostr experience. The discussion in my relay would be moderated but it can exist alongside whatever ppl prefer to add for themselves.

Substack newsletter in wake of the TikTok ban: "Our system gives creators ownership. With Substack, you have your own property to build on: content you own, a URL of your choosing, a website for your work, and a mailing list of your subscribers that you can export and take with you at any time. You also get a clear way to generate income that goes directly to you and is more reliable than fluctuating ad revenue or other third-party deals. Instead of chasing viral hits and algorithm changes, you can build sustainable income through direct support from your most engaged followers." ...Well. We don't agree on the definition of ownership. And a few other things

The narrative that "we are shitposting our way to a web of trust" is false. Nostr is useful so far *despite* having a social media aspect. And if anything, the more you shitpost the more likely I will unfollow you. Perhaps in this case shitposting does help... removing irrelevant people from my life. It is a proof of irrelevance. So all you shitposters please keep revealing yourselves. Helps keeping my house clean.

Test zap goals

SatShoot has only one open issue left on GitHub: We can't yet appreciate enough nor comprehend how profound of a change this is. The initial vision of Git is being completed. Looking forward we only see rough edges and uncertainty. Looking back it will be obvious.

What is the best way to get the exact relays that an event was received from in rust-nostr? I am using fetch_events() then process/filter them. After the fetch and processing I want to add relay hints to event id-s when I am constructing my kind 5300 #dvm responses. cc @Yuki Kishimoto #rust #asknostr #rustnostr

Hey @Don't Believe The Vibe 🌱🍋🍊 I am testing the tutorial of nostr-dvm. I encountered a weird issue: - In '04_simple_chat_bot.py' I managed to run the DVM however when I send it a message, the reply message fails with error. - I think there is a bug in how it tries to send reply DM - I tried to fix the problematic line but can't get the modified code under 'nostr_utils.py' to execute